EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

Community Judging Standard

  1. Application
    This standard will apply to judgements on all debates that have been marked with the community standard for judging, which is to become the default judging standard on edeb8 using the new standards system.

  2. Terms of Use
    Nothing in this document shall be construed as revoking or replacing any aspect of the terms of use for the site.

  3. Interpretation
    These rules are to be interpreted according to their literal meaning as well as their purpose.

  4. Penalty
    Should a judgement be made which is found to run afoul of these rules, by means of a transparent procedure, it will be removed and the involved member barred from judging the debate again, unless allowed by the moderator if they consider the incident to be minor or trivial. In certain cases, a member may be allowed to simply amend their previous judgement to comply with the rules.

  5. Judges to Follow Debaters’ Instructions
    In the event that debaters have posted specific rules in the “Additional Rules” of the debate which contradict this judging standard, the rules of the debaters shall take precedence over those in this document.

  6. Irrelevant RFDs
    In explaining their reasoning for the decision, debaters should make clear reference to the debate. Should a judgment be used primarily as a vehicle for content other than reasoning on the outcome of the debate it will run afoul of this rule. However, judges will not be penalized for including such content in the wider context of an otherwise good vote.

  7. Vote Bombing
    Judges shall not use judgments to explain their personal beliefs on the topic. Should a judge appear to have based their decision on personal belief, it will run afoul of this rule.

  8. Outside Material
    Judges shall not, in their reasoning, materially consider in their judgment any details not part of the debate. Examples include the debate comment section, other judgements, the rules of the debate, forum posts, status updates, profiles, private messages, chat messages, shoutbox messages, the users’ current Elo scores, etc. Judges will not be disqualified, however, for identifying key themes found in the debate even if the debaters did not themselves signpost them.

  9. Rambling
    Judgements shall not repeat material, use superfluous language or otherwise find ways to post additional material where this is clearly being done to allow the judgment to be awarded more points.

  10. Both Debaters Considered
    Judges should consider the arguments of all debaters involved in the debate when making their final determination, provided that such debaters made an argument in the debate. A considered argument is one where it has been analyzed to determine its standing in the debate, giving reason(s)

  11. Judgement to Reflect Analysis
    The awarding of the debate should be reflective of the reasoning for the decision.

  12. Dropped Arguments
    Uncontested or dropped points should not be assumed to be substantive.

Posted by admin
< Return to resources index page


Sorry, you need to be logged in to leave a comment